MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2733552843

The Resignation of Robin Camp: Background and Reflections

2017· article· en· W2733552843 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Alice Woolley

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLegal Education and Practice Innovations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComplaintPlaintiffContext (archaeology)Economic JusticeLawPolitical scienceHistoryArchaeology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

On March 8, 2017, the Canadian Judicial Council (“CJC”) recommended that Justice Robin Camp – who asked a complainant in a rape trial, “Why couldn’t you just keep your knees together?” – be removed from the bench. Camp resigned that day, becoming only the third federally appointed judge in Canadian history to do so. This comment, an abbreviated version of which is forthcoming in Legal Ethics, sets out the background for the complaint to the CJC, summarizes the process before the CJC and its decisions, and offers some broader context and reflections.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.034
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.065
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.662
Threshold uncertainty score0.680

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0340.065
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0660.052
Scholarly communication0.0230.014
Open science0.0080.010
Research integrity0.0410.073
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.003

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.071
GPT teacher head0.432
Teacher spread0.361 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic Journal→Same topicLegal Education and Practice Innovations→French-language works237,207→